I don’t know that the Republicans are super duper keen on passing the dream act and are just waiting for the Democrats to throw in something to sweeten the pot.
I don’t recall saying that the tariff would be prohibitive giving domestic producers an effective MONOPOLY. I’m pretty sure I said 10%, that doesn’t even cover the difference in cost of labor between the US and Mexico. And protectionism is rampant all over the world in developed and indusstrialized countries because they like how it works out for them. Ask France, ask Germany, ask Japan, they all practice protectionism to some degree. The unfettered free market simply isn’t the panacea some people seem to think it is.
Protectionism is good for domestic suppliers, that includes domestic suppliers of labor. It is bad for domestic consumers but depending on the situation it can be much more good for producers of labor than it is bad for consumers.
… according to politicians and fringe economists.
I don’t think any economist is going to argue that protectionism is bad for those being protected.
The latest polls show that roughly 15% of Americans think Dreamers should be deported. If it becomes an election issue (starts in 6 months, deportations starting roughly 3-6 months after that, so mid-summer 2018), are Republicans willing to go to the voting booth with 3/4 of the population thinking they’re idiots? Despite what Trump and his minions may claim, whatever is happening in DC is not the fault of Democrats. Why should they be making concessions?
It’d be built on top of agricultural land, much of it owned by chicanos. The wall may be money spent in Texas, but it’d be an attack on the property & livelihoods of people who actually live by the Rio Grande. No Texas governor would be fool enough to propose it, and your state’s governors are known to typically be fools. It’s an act of war on tejanos by a Scotsman/New Yorker who’s never lived in Texas.
Or, “I won’t punch these kids over there in the face; but that’s if you let me declare eminent domain on a bunch of farmland and destroy it, which otherwise would have no chance or passing.” I’m a big government socialist, but in this case, the government would be doing things to other people that make pure anarchy sound better.
I can’t seem to multi-quote, so I lost the post I was going to respond to. Anyway…
I will grant that protectionism has some social utility, but the point of it is certainly not to lower the price demanded by an exporting country for goods they sell to you. If that were the effect, it could be drastically economically counter-productive. It would mean a thumb depressing the economy of that exporting country, and meanwhile your country would gain none of the benefits of protectionism as generally understood.
The point of protectionism is not to punish foreign exporters, but to tax your own citizens for buying foreign goods. The idea is that the retail price of foreign goods will go up, and your country’s consumers will buy domestic goods, propping up domestic industry as part of an industrial policy.
I just read a story on WaPo (can’t link, it is in an app) that starts:
Art of the deal, I guess.
Here’s more from TPM:
Sometimes I think they’re just playing him: “Donald, watch. We’ll announce a deal and you will become popular again…” (later) “See? Let’s do another one!”
The fact that the Democrats can bury him with his base simply by hugging him seems to be lost on him.
No one really knows how the game is played
The art of the trade
How the sausage gets made
So Trump’s agreed to legislative DACA, and a border security package (that does not include the wall), but he’s free to keep independently pushing the wall.
Wow. he is a masterful negotiator. :rolleyes:
This is a good outcome, though, so perhaps I shouldn’t snark.
But just sayin’, if I had to pick the winning negotiator here, it would not be Trump.
Good.
Just let’s not gloat too loud or he’ll double down on something just as bad or worse just to get the basketful to cheer again.
And, in a move that NOBODY could have predicted, Trump is denying there’s a deal.
Sorta.
What a joke. This guy is the worst negotiator I’ve ever seen.
Donald then went on to tweet:
He’s just losing it.
I remember reading a book about winning tactics in car buying, and the author used vignettes of a fictional salesman to illustrate his points. In one, the salesman shows how easily he flummoxes a customer who is convinced he can’t be taken, because he, the customer, is a life insurance salesman and knows all the sales tricks. As an aside, the author added that our antihero car salesman carries very expensive and unneeded life insurance, because he, too, was “taken,” when he dealt with his own insurance salesman.
The lesson was that while there may be principles applicable to sales generically, there are enough complexities in both car and life insurance sales to make them unique, and mastering one field means little to success in the other.
I have no strong opinion on Trump’s mastery of the art of the real estate deal; I have a general impression he’s better than average based on his success.
But that skill, if indeed he has it, does not map at all to the world of political deal making. He’s a supremely overconfident utter novice, a walking illustration of Dunning Kroger, so uninformed that he lacks the tools to assess his own lack of competence.
“Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!..”
So serving in the military is a good thing right? Unless you are transgender, I guess.
In Florida today to look at Irma damage, Donald was asked to clarify the whole DACA things -